Some of this will not be new to those of you who read other people's notes, but I bet there are a few new bits for you here, so I've provided a user-friendly Table of Contents, as an homage to the Contents that appear before each book of the bible in the new NWT. I might remember more highlights later, as I'm rather tired right now, but this is what I can recall off the top of my head.
Contents (use of quote marks in this section is facetious; these are not actual quotes)
1. "Say, did you notice that 2014 is the 100th anniversary, people?"
2. Mark's gospel just got shorter.
3. "We know even less than we thought we did about God's name."
4. "Other Bibles are doing it, so why can't we?"
5. "Don't test the faith, stupid, test your faith!"
6. No plates were passed.
7. Many jokes were cracked.
8. "Have we ever mentioned how much we like the KJV?"
9. New Bible seems to be trying to tell us something about the GB.
10. Sanderson tells the greatest shaggy dog story ever.
11. The new Bible isn't quite as dirty-sounding as the old one.
12. 1914 is here to stay.
13. Correction: Jesus was not impaled.
14. Closing thoughts.
Notes
1. Br. Loesch announced next year's Year Text as "Let your Kingdom come" and explained that this was appropriate for the 100th anniversary of Jesus' enthronment. The audience oohed appreciatively as if they had not thought of that.
I know that many of us have been hoping that 2014 would be a wake-up call for JWs that an awful long time has passed since Jesus' supposed second coming, and that the Society must want to tiptoe around that inconvenience. Instead, Loesch was quite in-your-face about it. Perhaps, as a couple more years pass, 2014 will have an effect. But at the moment, chalk up 0 for the apostates and 1 for the GB, as the audience did not seem concerned in the slightest about the 100th anniversary.
2. Goodbye, "spurious" endings to Mark! I was personally more surprised by this than anything else that happened. It was acknowledged that 'more evidence is now available than in the past' that the endings were later insertions. Of course the true significance of Mark's abrupt ending will probably be lost on JWs, since they have never heard of the theory of "Markan priority".
3. Our attention was drawn to appendix A4, about the divine name. This surprised me because the appendix basically acknowledges that we don't know how to say the divine name, and (as the speaker pointed out) even the meaning "He Causes to Become" is disputed. They also backed away from the reading in Ex. 3:14 "I Will Prove to Be What I Will Prove to Be" as a fuller meaning of his name.
This kind of uncertainty is rather disappointing for someone who is supposed to be in direct contact with God, isn't it? I have to give credit to the appendix itself for its truthfulness. It mentions, among other interesting things, that one transliteration of the name, which may reflect its actual original pronunication, is "Iao" (what some have spelled "Yaho") or "Iaoue" ("Yahweh"). It does not mention that a Jesuit priest invented the English spelling, but it points to the significant fact that an approximation of this spelling was first used in Tyndale's Bible ("Iehouah"), then other early Bibles; this is something which I think apostates tend to overlook when trying to reverse-witness at JWs.
4. There was much defensiveness by Sanderson and in the new Bible appendices about the placing of the divine name in the Greek Scriptures. They pointed out that "other Bibles have done it". Okay...? This was just one of the discordant notes related to other Bible translations that they hit in the meeting (more on this in #8). Of course they also mentioned that many of the places they use the name are quotations of Hebrew scriptures.
Naturally this ignores the fact that the first Christians, being Jews, would never have gone around shouting the Ineffable Name on the streets, and if they did, this certainly would have been a reason given for their persecution in books like Acts. But we can't expect the Society to acknowledge this historical reality. Also, they added the divine name six more places in the Greek Scriptures (which felt like a "take that" to their critics).
5. A point I saw mentioned here already, but it really bears repeating: one speaker (sorry, I don't have all the GB faces and names memorized) was emphatic that we need to test the strength of our faith, not test the faith itself, "because we already know it's the truth". That was the most cultish moment in my opinion.
6. Contrary to what many here predicted, there was practically no mention of a need for money or a suggested donation, not even in connection with the Bibles that were handed out to all in attendance.
7. Like 'em or hate 'em, the GB is a pretty charismatic bunch. They all got laughs with their jokes and seemed pleasant enough. The main exception to this was Morris, who I could tell was a bit grating for the audience as a whole, not just me. His condescension is so powerful that it partially overwhelmed even the long-suffering sheep. Oops, I meant "patient" sheep (see #11).
8. The new apps are pretty nice. A slightly awkward moment when the logo of each OS appeared onscreen like a big advertisement before showing each app, but I think they were trying to be clear on which version they were about to show. Something pesonally surprising to me: during this presentation by a non-GB member, he proudly pointed to how you could instantly bring up alternate translations for any verse -- if memory serves, it was the ASV, the Byington, the King James (!), and one other. This was not the only love shown for the King James version during the meeting, as Br. Herd brought out his well-worn personal copy and talked about his fond memories of using it in the old days. I thought that was the Bible with all that bad Christendom stuff in it, you know, like crosses and hellfire? And now the Society is putting it back into (digital) print?!
9. I am not fond of the new Bible's gray, but the contents look good. The fonts are very nice, there's two bookmarks, the layout is fresh-feeling, and the appendices are genuinely interesting (of course they push WT theology in some parts, like a confident reconstruction of the timeline of Jesus' life that pretends there are no conflicts in the gospels, but they've done that kind of thing before).
Before I forget, I noticed that the bookmarks open to the passage starting at Jeremiah 14:14: "Jehovah then said to me: 'The prophets are prophesying lies in my name. I have not sent them or commanded them or spoken to them. A lying vision and a worthless divination and the deceit of their own heart is what they are prophesying.'" Yes, really. I swear those are the first verses in the pages that the bookmark opens to. Of course this account means something different to us than it will to the JW reader.
10. The meeting opened with Br. Sanderson talking at ridiculous length about a Bible display they put up at "headquarters" (did he even say which facility?!). After half an hour of detailing how every damn Bible was found or borrowed, he proceeded to not show us a single picture of any Bible of display, and walked off-stage.
11. The choice of sample changes by Br. Jackson et al. in the new NWT were rather interesting. An "exposed themselves" is now something like 'showed themselves openly', "those urinating against the wall" is now "males", and Br. Lett told us that "ass" is now "donkey" (the audience managed not to snicker here; in fact, I think they were embarrassed). Yes, half of the examples given were PG-rated.
The other changes that I recall were 2 Tim. 1:13, which used to say "Keep holding the pattern of healthful words" and now says "the standard of wholesome words", and Phil. 3:16, which used to say "let us go on walking orderly in this same routine" is now "in this same course". As mentioned above, "long-suffering" is now phased out in favor of "patience".
I can't vouch for all the changes, but this seems to take the wind out of the sails of all the hyperbolic claims that the Society was going to dumb down the wording, or make radical or doctrinally-motivated changes to the translation. I wholeheartedly agree with the changes I've seen so far, as they reflect modern English usage better, and don't seem to sacrifice accuracy for readability.
12. Sorry to those who are predicting a dropping of 1914 (wait, that includes me!), but they seem to be doubling down on the broken chronology. The appendices mention both 607 BCE and 1914 CE.
13. You might be surprised to hear that Jesus was not impaled after all. Yes, the GB openly said that "impale" was not a good choice of word, because it implies a method of execution resembling shishkabob, whereas Jesus was nailed to a stake, not run through with it. Thus, the crowd now calls out "To the stake with him!" instead of "Impale him!", and Jesus was "executed on the stake", not "impaled".
14. Besides technical glitches at a few sites, the event went off without a hitch. The talks were well-delivered besides the irritating demeanor of Morris and the picture-less talk of Sanderson's about the blasted Bible display. The friends were clearly excited by the new Bible. I know some have said that the JWs expected a new Bible, but they apparently didn't expect them to be handed out right after the speaker announced the new edition. The excitement really was palpable. While apostates may be disappointed that nothing crazy and overly cultish happened, the rank and file seemed to enjoy the event quite a bit. I think it's safe to say that this will become a regular occurrence even if they don't have any bombshell news to reveal in future AGMs.